Lust and bestiality

caridwen

Aeon418 said:
I don't dispute that the vesica predates Christianty. But you seem to be suggesting that because Jesus was male he has nothing to do with anything Piscean.

Not at all - what I am saying is it was first associated with the Great Mother and later adopted by Christianity. Does that mean I don't associate Jesus with it when Jesus is quite clearly referenced as a fish symbol?

True, but Christianity became the one that dominated a large section of this planet for 2000 years.

Well Christianity dominated the Western part of the world and through colonisation spread to places such as the far East and Africa but I'm afraid many parts of Asia will dispute that. Since they are all Buddhist. Which leads us back to the paternity of these spiritual leaders....my original question....
 

Aeon418

caridwen said:
Which leads us back to the paternity of these spiritual leaders....my original question....
Back to the The Book of Thoth again then...
The central mystery in that past Aeon was that of Incarnation; all the legends of god-men were founded upon some symbolic story of that kind. The essential of all such stories was to deny human fatherhood to the hero or god-man. In most cases, the father is stated to be a god in some animal form, the animal being chosen in accordance with the qualities that the authors of the cult wished to see reproduced in the child.
Similar fables are to be found in every religion of the Aeon of Osiris: it is the typical formula of the Dying God.
(Emphasis mine.)
 

ravenest

Here ya go caridwen ... a Non Thothey, non thelemic, non- refrenced to crowley answer (off the top of MY head)

{You know how I like to bring everything back to Egypt}, Divine beings or gods or neturu often have an animal head or are depicted as an animal. So someone seeking spiritual cred (or their followers) will make one parent an animal.

????
 

Scion

I'd also suggest digging out an old essay called "Animal-Headed Gods, Evangelists, Saints and Righteous Men" by Zofia Ameisenowa (1949, Journal of the Warburg Institute) which connects the union of animal and human in the ancient consciousness with the process of being turned into a star.

Ameisenowa focusses on Ophite Gnosticism, which (to my mind) makes it all the more approproate for consideration to LUST. And because of the date, it's quite likely that Crowley would have been more than a little familiar with it as an academic position.

Anyone have any sense of Crowley's awareness of Warburg and his Institute? Now there's a meeting I would have loved to witness. :)
 

caridwen

Scion said:
I'd also suggest digging out an old essay called "Animal-Headed Gods, Evangelists, Saints and Righteous Men" by Zofia Ameisenowa (1949, Journal of the Warburg Institute) which connects the union of animal and human in the ancient consciousness with the process of being turned into a star.

Ameisenowa focusses on Ophite Gnosticism, which (to my mind) makes it all the more approproate for consideration to LUST. And because of the date, it's quite likely that Crowley would have been more than a little familiar with it as an academic position.

Anyone have any sense of Crowley's awareness of Warburg and his Institute? Now there's a meeting I would have loved to witness. :)

How cool are you:D Where on earth can I get this thing? Do you have a link?:)
 

Emily

Scion said:
I'd also suggest digging out an old essay called "Animal-Headed Gods, Evangelists, Saints and Righteous Men" by Zofia Ameisenowa (1949, Journal of the Warburg Institute) which connects the union of animal and human in the ancient consciousness with the process of being turned into a star.

Ameisenowa focusses on Ophite Gnosticism, which (to my mind) makes it all the more approproate for consideration to LUST. And because of the date, it's quite likely that Crowley would have been more than a little familiar with it as an academic position :)

Will this be in the next version of your guide? }) :) - Inquiring minds want to know lol
 

ravenest

Scion said:
I'd also suggest digging out an old essay called "Animal-Headed Gods, Evangelists, Saints and Righteous Men" by Zofia Ameisenowa (1949, Journal of the Warburg Institute) which connects the union of animal and human in the ancient consciousness

I am DEFINATLY in for that one ... especially this bit;

Scion said:
with the process of being turned into a star.

YEAH! Stella Yoga! Right up my alley!
 

tarotrose

some thoughts...

I haven't studied so specifically Crowley or some of the history of religion some folks here have, but I've studied "around" the subject of hero myths where the father was in animal form, and here are some of the things bumping around in my head about that:

First, in religions that incorporate some type of "animal-spirit guide," or whose pantheon includes animal or part-animal figures, it seems that some uncanny or "divine" attribute of the animal is what is, in fact, venerated, yes? Like for the Hindus, there was a belief that elephants were actually clouds come down to earth, do I remember that right? Something uncanny and enviable. The stealth, power and night-vision of cats... Etc. So for a person/hero who probably displays some kind of super-human attributes, formulating a part-animal parentage to explain that would make sense? There may not be a strict cause and effect here, but the two things -- the supernatural power of the hero, and the uncanny abilities of animals -- seem to fit together?

Second, it seems from what I have read, that in some contexts, Crowley disparaged knowledge in the sense of book learning, suggesting that it can be used to shield one from having to deal with wisdom that is "intuitive" or of supernatural origin. For example, considering "daath" in qabalah as false knowledge, and seeing it as a detour that delays one's true enlightenment. Some cults of animal wisdom, it seems, also suggest that humanity over-thinks, and that the way to enlightenment is to get in touch with one's animal nature. Actually, some branches of eco-feminism flirt with this idea -- that real wisdom comes from being more in touch with the natural world. Actually, I flirt with that a bit myself, although a Dominican education won't let me give up entirely my faith in the capability of the human mind. Recovering from this tangent, let me summerize that a hero's animal parentage might be seen to tie into the co-existence of animal nature/wisdom and human nature/wisdom in the hero.

Lust/Strength seems to celibrate that animal wisdom -- the wisdom of our desire, of what brings us pleasure, of listening to our "animal" nature. Where in Rider-Waite the pure young woman tames the wild beast, in Thoth, the wild nature of the woman allows her to work with the beast.

What do you think?
 

Aeon418

tarotrose said:
Actually, some branches of eco-feminism flirt with this idea -- that real wisdom comes from being more in touch with the natural world.
Get the instinctual/feminine and the rational/masculine parts of the self to work together and you're not far off from what Crowley called the Great Work, the union of the Sun and the Moon. Either one on it's own is not enough.
 

caridwen

tarotrose said:
Lust/Strength seems to celibrate that animal wisdom -- the wisdom of our desire, of what brings us pleasure, of listening to our "animal" nature. Where in Rider-Waite the pure young woman tames the wild beast, in Thoth, the wild nature of the woman allows her to work with the beast.

What do you think?

I think that's a very interesting post:) However, I'm wondering if she's working with the beast or riding it and in a sense controlling it? It's interesting to compare Ishtar with the image. Ishtar is a Babylonian goddess associated with love, fertility, sex and prostitution. In the Epic of Gligamesh, she is described as having

"...loved the lion tremendous in strength: seven pits you dug for him, and seven. You have loved the stallion magnificent in battle, and for him you decreed the whip and spur and a thong [...] You have loved the shepherd of the flock; he made meal-cake for you day after day, he killed kids for your sake. You struck and turned him into a wolf; now his own herd-boys chase him away, his own hounds worry his flanks."

Ishtar not only descends into the underworld and is reborn but has a sun god as lover in similar vein to Aphrodite's Adonis and again she is also known as Inanna whose lover was Dumuzi. Her symbol is a lion which she is often depicted standing on a lion's back. She is a dynamic force for change who has the final word on what will manifest for humankind.

The antichrist is also described as having seven heads:

"...saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. [2] And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion..." Rev. 13:1-2